New research by Kingston University and King’s College London has found there is limited evidence on whether residential family assessment centres (RFACS) improve long-term outcomes for children, despite them more than doubling in number since 2018.

RFACs are specialist units where parents live alongside their babies or young children for around three months under in a structured residential assessment environment. Staff observe parenting, provide practical and emotional support and prepare reports that inform court decisions about a child’s future care.

The study by Professor of Social Work at Kingston University Rick Hood and Reader in Social Care at King’s College London Dr Mary Baginsky found the number of RFACs in England more than doubled between 2018 and 2025. Despite this rapid growth, the sector has developed without a national strategy, routine outcome monitoring or a strong evidence base about what works best for children and families.

They also found England relies on residential family assessments far more than most other countries and uses them more extensively within family court decision-making. The findings suggest that RFACs now play an increasingly important role in family court decision-making and child protection practice.

Professor Hood and Dr Baginsky gathered data from Ofsted inspection reports, discussions with local authorities and consultations with parent who had experienced residential assessment.

They found RFACs play several roles at once including assessing parent capacity, supporting parents to make changes, safeguarding infants and providing evidence for courts making life-changing decisions about children’s futures.

Parents described centres as places where support and surveillance existed side by side. Many valued the practical and emotional support they received while also describing the stress of living under constant observation during a period when decisions about their child's future were being made.

Reviewing their findings, the researchers found many centres provide high-quality, relationship-based support and assessment. However, there is little evidence about their longer-term effectiveness, whether assessments accurately predict future parenting, or how residential assessments compare with alternative forms of family support.

Professor Hood and Dr Baginsky concluded that better outcome monitoring and a clearer national understanding of the purpose of residential family assessment centres are needed if policymakers are to assess whether these services are delivering the best possible outcomes for children and families.

Professor Hood said: “Residential family assessment centres are making some of the most important decisions in children's social care, yet we know remarkably little about their longer-term impact. Given the rapid growth of the sector, there is a clear need for better evidence about what works, for whom, and under what circumstances.”